International Justice Tribune (RNW), June 2, 2010
US lawyer Peter Erlinder is being held by Rwandan authorities, charged with denying the country’s 1994 genocide. Under a 2003 law, persons convicted of denying or grossly minimising genocide, attempting to justify genocide or destroying evidence related to it are liable to a minimum of 10 years and a maximum of 20 in prison.
Erlinder arrived in Rwanda last week to defend aspiring presidential candidate Victoire Ingabire. Ingabire was herself arrested and released on bail in April, charged with promoting genocide ideology and with having ties to the Democratic Forces for the Liberation of Rwanda, a UN-listed terrorist group.
Rwandan chief prosecutor, Martin Ngoga, told AFP that Erlinder was arrested for remarks made in publications and statements. “Erlinder’s unapologetic violation of these laws is self-evident. He has continually engaged in conspiracy theories and denial surrounding the circumstances of the genocide...Entering Rwanda was a brazen act of provocation, since Erlinder must clearly understand he is in breach of the laws of our country.”
In April, Erlinder - who represents top genocide suspects at the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda - filed a lawsuit in the US alleging that current Rwandan president Paul Kagame ordered the attack on a plane carrying then-leader Juvenal Habyarimana, an event that triggered the bloodshed 16 years ago.
“The offence Peter is charged with is [based] on the suppression of free speech in his representation of clients, which undermines the rule of law,” Masako Usui, Erlinder’s wife, said in a statement.
The US State Department will hold a press conference on Erlinder’s detention later today.
Also read: Rwanda genocide tribunal rapped for silence over jailed US lawyer
Showing posts with label Rwanda. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Rwanda. Show all posts
Commander concerned over UN abuse rumours in DR Congo
AFP, Google News, July 24, 2009
KINSHASA — The head of UN peacekeepers in DR Congo has said he is concerned at "persistent rumours" of sexual abuse perpetrated by his troops and has sent a fact-finding mission to the east of the country, the UN mission said in a statement.
"General Babacar Gaye said he was concerned at persistent rumours of misconduct, and hoped the fact-finding team would shed light on them," the statement released in Kinshasa said.
"If they find indications of misconduct, we will refer their findings to a more formal process of investigation," said Gaye, head of the world's largest UN peacekeeping mission, known as MONUC.
In a directive to all brigade commanders on June 27, Gaye said that 10 cases of sexual exploitation and abuse had been investigated by military police in 2008, but he was concerned that other cases might have gone undetected, the statement said.
He said he was particularly concerned about possible breaches of conduct by soldiers in remote locations.
"What we are talking about here is zero tolerance for any behaviour that disrespects women and girls and the communities in which they live," explained the UN secretary-general's special envoy to DR Congo, Alan Doss.
"A very small number of peacekeepers have abused the trust of the Congolese people in the past, and the overwhelming majority who serve with honour in this mission resent the damage that a few individuals can do to the credibility of peacekeeping."
Gaye said in the statement that any evidence brought to light by the fact-finding team would be the subject of formal investigation by the UN's investigative arm, which operates outside of the MONUC chain of command.
"I have instructed my commanders to ensure our peacekeepers understand that everyone, regardless of rank, is responsible to be alert to the possibility of offences and to report transgressors," the general said.
MONUC spokesman Lieutenant-Colonel Jean Paul Dietrich told AFP there had been no specific allegations of abuse.
MONUC said the fact-finding mission will visit a number of bases as well as camps responsible for the protection of tens of thousands of Congolese displaced by violence in Nord-Kivu province.
The team is expected to report back by the end of the month.
Some 17,000 UN troops are taking part in the mission, mostly in the northeastern part of the country, where government forces have been fighting Ugandan and Rwandan rebels for several years, and some 1.8 million people have been displaced.
KINSHASA — The head of UN peacekeepers in DR Congo has said he is concerned at "persistent rumours" of sexual abuse perpetrated by his troops and has sent a fact-finding mission to the east of the country, the UN mission said in a statement.
"General Babacar Gaye said he was concerned at persistent rumours of misconduct, and hoped the fact-finding team would shed light on them," the statement released in Kinshasa said.
"If they find indications of misconduct, we will refer their findings to a more formal process of investigation," said Gaye, head of the world's largest UN peacekeeping mission, known as MONUC.
In a directive to all brigade commanders on June 27, Gaye said that 10 cases of sexual exploitation and abuse had been investigated by military police in 2008, but he was concerned that other cases might have gone undetected, the statement said.
He said he was particularly concerned about possible breaches of conduct by soldiers in remote locations.
"What we are talking about here is zero tolerance for any behaviour that disrespects women and girls and the communities in which they live," explained the UN secretary-general's special envoy to DR Congo, Alan Doss.
"A very small number of peacekeepers have abused the trust of the Congolese people in the past, and the overwhelming majority who serve with honour in this mission resent the damage that a few individuals can do to the credibility of peacekeeping."
Gaye said in the statement that any evidence brought to light by the fact-finding team would be the subject of formal investigation by the UN's investigative arm, which operates outside of the MONUC chain of command.
"I have instructed my commanders to ensure our peacekeepers understand that everyone, regardless of rank, is responsible to be alert to the possibility of offences and to report transgressors," the general said.
MONUC spokesman Lieutenant-Colonel Jean Paul Dietrich told AFP there had been no specific allegations of abuse.
MONUC said the fact-finding mission will visit a number of bases as well as camps responsible for the protection of tens of thousands of Congolese displaced by violence in Nord-Kivu province.
The team is expected to report back by the end of the month.
Some 17,000 UN troops are taking part in the mission, mostly in the northeastern part of the country, where government forces have been fighting Ugandan and Rwandan rebels for several years, and some 1.8 million people have been displaced.
Laurent Nkunda's "Arrest:" Rwanda's Latest Shell Game in Response to International Pressure
Friends Of The Congo, Jan. 30, 2009
Over the past week, events have unfolded at a dizzying pace in the Central Africa region; hence Friends of Congo thought it would be useful to add some context to the situation based on questions posed to us.
Is Laurent Nkunda’s arrest a positive development?
We have reasons to doubt that Laurent Nkunda has been arrested. Rwandan Maj. Jill Rutaremara said that Nkunda was in Rwanda but "not in jail." If Nkunda has in fact been arrested it would be a positive development but not a massive change as some analysts would like you to believe. A true marker of the veracity of Rwanda’s claims of arresting Nkunda will be the extradition of Nkunda to the Congo where he committed the crimes against the Congolese people. If Nkunda is not extradited to Congo in short order then that will be a clear sign that this is part of the shell game that Rwanda has been playing for the past 12 years, a period during which they replaced one proxy leader with another while they continued to occupy Eastern Congo. Even if Nkunda were to be arrested, it would be a fundamental flaw in one’s reasoning to believe that Nkunda was the primary cause of the conflict in the east. In essence, what has happened is that Nkunda’s National Congress for the Defense of the People has been replaced by thousands of Rwandan troops. The problem is Rwanda’s and Uganda’s aggression against the Congo backed primarily by the United States and British governments and corporate interests since 1996.
If Rwanda did in fact arrest Nkunda, doesn’t this mean that they never supported him as the December 12th UN Report documented?
No, to the contrary, over the past twelve years Rwanda has shuffled different rebel leaders according to its interests. It is in part for this reason there were so many versions of the Rally for Congolese Democracy (RCD, former rebel militia backed by Rwanda), which Nkunda was a part of in 1998 – 2002 war. Nkunda’s apparent replacement, Jean-Bosco Ntaganda, also has an arrest warrant out for him issued by the International Criminal Court; one human rights offender has been replaced by another as Bosco now proclaims to head the CNDP.
A systemic and historical analysis is warranted in order to demystify current events in the Congo and arrive at prescriptions that will lead to lasting peace and stability. Unfortunately, the majority of Great Lakes analysts offer Rwanda-friendly analysis and prescriptions as Rwanda represents the US and British foreign policy interests in Central Africa. These analysts’ job is to provide intellectual and advocacy cover for an otherwise disastrous policy across now two US and British administrations that have led to the deaths of millions of Congolese and the systematic looting of Congo’s wealth to the benefit of U.S. allies Rwanda and Uganda as well as Western corporations.
Isn’t the new collaboration between Congo and Rwanda a good sign on the road to peace and stability in the region?
On December 5th, Rwanda and Congo signed a secret pact in Goma that the Congolese people know nothing about (President Kabila is scheduled to speak to his nation on this issue on Saturday, January 31, 2009). James Kabarebe, Chief of General Staff of the Rwandan Defense Forces and former private secretary and aide-de-camp of Rwanda’s president Paul Kagame was later dispatched to Kinshasa to consummate a deal with President Kabila. Thus, Rwandan President Paul Kagame, James Kabarebe, and President Kabila worked out a deal that resulted in over 5,000 Rwandan soldiers entering Congo. These are the same characters that collaborated in 1996 when Congo was first invaded by Rwanda during the Clinton administration. During that period they traversed the Congo slaughtering Hutu man, woman and child and anyone else who was in the way. The United Nations says that the killings were so massive and systematic that they can be considered crimes against humanity and possibly genocide. The United Nations investigation into these crimes against humanity by the Rwandan army, Kabarebe and Kabila was blocked and still remains to be resolved (see the UN investigations: http://www.inshuti.org/onua.htm). Once a responsible and credible government is in place in Congo all these crimes must be investigated and justice must be delivered so that the Congolese people can be made whole. Find out more about the Kagame, Kabarebe, Kabila connection in our January 20th Blog. In the final analysis, more troops and further militarization of the region is not the answer. A robust political path must be established in order to lead to peace and stability in the Great Lakes region.
So are you saying that President Kabila allowing Rwandan troops on Congolese soil to hunt down those responsible for the 1994 genocide is not a good thing?
The logic that allowing Rwandan soldiers on Congolese territory to hunt down Hutu rebels will bring about peace is fundamentally flawed. Below are some factors to consider:
1. The deal allowing Rwandan soldiers on Congolese soil was not between the Congolese government and the Rwandan government. It was between the Congolese president Joseph Kabila, whom many suspect is not even Congolese and the Kagame regime in Kigali. Neither the Congolese parliament nor the Congolese people were either consulted or addressed regarding Rwandan troops entering Congolese territory. In fact some Congolese are calling for the impeachment of Kabila. When it comes to matters in Africa, we tend to drop all critical faculties and common sense. Can you imagine troops entering US territory without the US Congress knowing about it and the president not even addressing the population to explain why? What is even more farcical is that some Congolese government officials are trying to convince the world that thousands of Rwandan soldiers are coming into the Congo as advisers to the Congolese troops. It has even been stated that the Rwandan troops will be under Congolese command. Will they be under the same compromised command that Nkunda chased out of North Kivu?
2. It is beyond imagination that Rwanda is going to do in a few weeks what it was not able to do or interested in doing when it occupied the Congo from 1996 – 2002. During this period of the occupation of eastern Congo they did not wipe out the so-called Hutu militia. In fact, the biggest battle they had was with their ally Uganda over mining concessions. Also, during this time they systematically looted Congo of its wealth. (See UN Reports from 2001 – 2003). It is this looting of Congo’s wealth that spurred the economic miracle that President Clinton and other Western officials wax eloquently about in Rwanda. You will notice that they never mention the degree to which ill-gotten wealth from the Congo contributed to Rwanda’s “economic miracle”. Former Secretary of State for African Affairs, Herman Cohen says it best when he notes “Having controlled the Kivu provinces for 12 years, Rwanda will not relinquish access to resources that constitute a significant percentage of its gross national product”.
3. What is almost certain is that Rwandan troops on Congolese soil will lead to more suffering of the people of the Congo. Analysts in the West have not fully appreciated the enmity that the average Congolese holds toward Rwanda. Remember, it was the US and British backed Rwandan and Ugandan invasions of 1996 and 1998 that unleashed the deaths of estimated millions of Congolese. So, for one to say that Rwandan soldiers are now going to make things better for the people of the Congo does not take history into account. One merely has to look at the Congo-Ugandan action against Ugandan rebels inside Congolese territory to see where this latest action is heading. Over 600 Congolese civilians lost their lives as a result of military action against the Lord’s Resistance Army in Congo, which began over a month ago. Moreover, that operation was supposed to take a few weeks and now Uganda is requesting more time on Congo’s soil, while Congo’s gold and timber continue to find its way into Uganda.
What role are great powers playing in what is unfolding in the Congo?
It is key to understand how the game is played to keep Africa dependent and impoverished. Because the West is more powerful than the divided and weak African nations, they have been able to assassinate or systematically sideline leaders who truly serve the interest of the people. They facilitate the ascension to power of those who demonstrate a proclivity for killing their fellow Africans. Once these feckless leaders are in power and predictably incapable of governing, western diplomats condescendingly intervene on the premise that those they have assisted in acquiring power either through elections or otherwise cannot in fact justly govern. This narrative is buttressed by superficial media coverage of African society, intellectuals for hire by Western powers and the humanitarian industry. It is in this context that French President Nicolas Sarkozy and former Assistant Secretary of State for African Affairs, Herman Cohen, have proposed the balkanization and economic neutering of the Congo. They have made proposals to reward Rwanda and their Western support structure for the systematic looting of Congo, which has resulted in unmatched death and terror for the Congolese people. Nearly 125 years since Europe gave Congo to King Leopold II of Belgium as his own personal property, the situation is fundamentally the same whereby the affairs of the Congolese people are not determined by themselves; but rather by external forces.
So what can be positively drawn from recent events?
Several things can be looked at positively:
1. It is clear that international pressure works. It has moved Rwanda to at least announce the arrest of Nkunda. As was said, the litmus test for whether Nkunda has actually been arrested is his extradition to Kinshasa, otherwise for all intents and purposes he is vacationing in Rwanda at the behest of Kagame while Rwandan troops roam the hillsides of Eastern Congo with the blessing of Joseph Kabila. The U.S. is finding it increasingly difficult to defend its proxy, Rwanda, as both French and Spanish courts (the same Spanish court that ruled against Pinochet of Chile ) have arrest warrants out on President Kagame’s top officials for commission of war crimes, one of whom, Rose Kabuye, was arrested in Germany in November 2008. Despite such repeated damning evidence against the Kagame regime, under the auspices of Donald Rumsfeld’s AFRICOM program, the US sent a shipment of military equipment to Rwanda for peace keeping purposes in Western Sudan in early January 2009, coinciding with Rwandan troops intervention in Congo. The military shipment is supposed to be used for peace keeping in Western Sudan. Both Sweden and the Netherlands suspended aid to Rwanda and of course the damning December 12th UN Report have made it difficult for anyone to defend Rwanda except for some ideologically-driven humanitarian institutions. Even the New York Times editorial board continues to call for international pressure on Rwanda.
2. Kagame felt a necessity to adjust to the new realities in Washington. He could not necessarily count on President Obama to give him carte blanche as he has received from Presidents Clinton and Bush. Rwanda is certainly still a staunch ally of the U.S. However, Kagame cannot be certain that President Obama will fully support him in spite of some of the old guards (Susan Rice at the UN and Hillary Clinton as Secretary of State) being in the administration. The Obama administration can hardly present itself as an administration of change with an old policy for the Great Lakes in particular and Africa in general. The new administration would be best served to implement policies that serve the people and not strongmen like Kagame and Kabila.
3. The US and British baked resource war of aggression is being disrobed on a daily basis. The hunt for the Hutu rebels is an attempt to recast the conflict in an ethnic context. The Hutu rebels, otherwise know as the Interahamwe or Democratic Forces for the Liberation of Rwanda (FDLR in French) need to be dealt with, but not in the manner currently underway. Remember, it has been the Congolese people who have been the primary victims of the presence of the Hutu rebels in the Congo. Nonetheless, what is happening in Central Africa is a high stakes geo-political battle for precious and strategic resources that are vital to the world’s military, aeronautics, electronics and technology industries. This interview with British Foreign Minister David Miliband provides some insight and perspective on the vital corporate interests in Central Africa.
4. The average person is becoming better informed and more engaged about the root causes of the deadliest conflict in the world since World War Two. They are better equipped to demand action from their elected officials and challenge humanitarian institutions that come to their communities peddling warmed over ethnic explanations for the suffering of the people of Congo.
We are confident that with persistent education, organization and mobilization, the people of Congo will be free from the forces that have her sons and daughters living in absolute misery while we in the West benefit from her riches.
Join the global movement in support of the people of the Congo and strike a blow for justice and human dignity.
Produced by the FOTC Team
=====
Listen to weekly podcast.
Let President Obama know that a change is needed in US policy towards the Congo.
Sign-up for the Break the Silence Speakers Spring Tour.
Read the analysis on the latest UN Report on Congo by Kambale Musavuli.
Become a Friend of the Congo.
Over the past week, events have unfolded at a dizzying pace in the Central Africa region; hence Friends of Congo thought it would be useful to add some context to the situation based on questions posed to us.
Is Laurent Nkunda’s arrest a positive development?
We have reasons to doubt that Laurent Nkunda has been arrested. Rwandan Maj. Jill Rutaremara said that Nkunda was in Rwanda but "not in jail." If Nkunda has in fact been arrested it would be a positive development but not a massive change as some analysts would like you to believe. A true marker of the veracity of Rwanda’s claims of arresting Nkunda will be the extradition of Nkunda to the Congo where he committed the crimes against the Congolese people. If Nkunda is not extradited to Congo in short order then that will be a clear sign that this is part of the shell game that Rwanda has been playing for the past 12 years, a period during which they replaced one proxy leader with another while they continued to occupy Eastern Congo. Even if Nkunda were to be arrested, it would be a fundamental flaw in one’s reasoning to believe that Nkunda was the primary cause of the conflict in the east. In essence, what has happened is that Nkunda’s National Congress for the Defense of the People has been replaced by thousands of Rwandan troops. The problem is Rwanda’s and Uganda’s aggression against the Congo backed primarily by the United States and British governments and corporate interests since 1996.
If Rwanda did in fact arrest Nkunda, doesn’t this mean that they never supported him as the December 12th UN Report documented?
No, to the contrary, over the past twelve years Rwanda has shuffled different rebel leaders according to its interests. It is in part for this reason there were so many versions of the Rally for Congolese Democracy (RCD, former rebel militia backed by Rwanda), which Nkunda was a part of in 1998 – 2002 war. Nkunda’s apparent replacement, Jean-Bosco Ntaganda, also has an arrest warrant out for him issued by the International Criminal Court; one human rights offender has been replaced by another as Bosco now proclaims to head the CNDP.
A systemic and historical analysis is warranted in order to demystify current events in the Congo and arrive at prescriptions that will lead to lasting peace and stability. Unfortunately, the majority of Great Lakes analysts offer Rwanda-friendly analysis and prescriptions as Rwanda represents the US and British foreign policy interests in Central Africa. These analysts’ job is to provide intellectual and advocacy cover for an otherwise disastrous policy across now two US and British administrations that have led to the deaths of millions of Congolese and the systematic looting of Congo’s wealth to the benefit of U.S. allies Rwanda and Uganda as well as Western corporations.
Isn’t the new collaboration between Congo and Rwanda a good sign on the road to peace and stability in the region?
On December 5th, Rwanda and Congo signed a secret pact in Goma that the Congolese people know nothing about (President Kabila is scheduled to speak to his nation on this issue on Saturday, January 31, 2009). James Kabarebe, Chief of General Staff of the Rwandan Defense Forces and former private secretary and aide-de-camp of Rwanda’s president Paul Kagame was later dispatched to Kinshasa to consummate a deal with President Kabila. Thus, Rwandan President Paul Kagame, James Kabarebe, and President Kabila worked out a deal that resulted in over 5,000 Rwandan soldiers entering Congo. These are the same characters that collaborated in 1996 when Congo was first invaded by Rwanda during the Clinton administration. During that period they traversed the Congo slaughtering Hutu man, woman and child and anyone else who was in the way. The United Nations says that the killings were so massive and systematic that they can be considered crimes against humanity and possibly genocide. The United Nations investigation into these crimes against humanity by the Rwandan army, Kabarebe and Kabila was blocked and still remains to be resolved (see the UN investigations: http://www.inshuti.org/onua.htm). Once a responsible and credible government is in place in Congo all these crimes must be investigated and justice must be delivered so that the Congolese people can be made whole. Find out more about the Kagame, Kabarebe, Kabila connection in our January 20th Blog. In the final analysis, more troops and further militarization of the region is not the answer. A robust political path must be established in order to lead to peace and stability in the Great Lakes region.
So are you saying that President Kabila allowing Rwandan troops on Congolese soil to hunt down those responsible for the 1994 genocide is not a good thing?
The logic that allowing Rwandan soldiers on Congolese territory to hunt down Hutu rebels will bring about peace is fundamentally flawed. Below are some factors to consider:
1. The deal allowing Rwandan soldiers on Congolese soil was not between the Congolese government and the Rwandan government. It was between the Congolese president Joseph Kabila, whom many suspect is not even Congolese and the Kagame regime in Kigali. Neither the Congolese parliament nor the Congolese people were either consulted or addressed regarding Rwandan troops entering Congolese territory. In fact some Congolese are calling for the impeachment of Kabila. When it comes to matters in Africa, we tend to drop all critical faculties and common sense. Can you imagine troops entering US territory without the US Congress knowing about it and the president not even addressing the population to explain why? What is even more farcical is that some Congolese government officials are trying to convince the world that thousands of Rwandan soldiers are coming into the Congo as advisers to the Congolese troops. It has even been stated that the Rwandan troops will be under Congolese command. Will they be under the same compromised command that Nkunda chased out of North Kivu?
2. It is beyond imagination that Rwanda is going to do in a few weeks what it was not able to do or interested in doing when it occupied the Congo from 1996 – 2002. During this period of the occupation of eastern Congo they did not wipe out the so-called Hutu militia. In fact, the biggest battle they had was with their ally Uganda over mining concessions. Also, during this time they systematically looted Congo of its wealth. (See UN Reports from 2001 – 2003). It is this looting of Congo’s wealth that spurred the economic miracle that President Clinton and other Western officials wax eloquently about in Rwanda. You will notice that they never mention the degree to which ill-gotten wealth from the Congo contributed to Rwanda’s “economic miracle”. Former Secretary of State for African Affairs, Herman Cohen says it best when he notes “Having controlled the Kivu provinces for 12 years, Rwanda will not relinquish access to resources that constitute a significant percentage of its gross national product”.
3. What is almost certain is that Rwandan troops on Congolese soil will lead to more suffering of the people of the Congo. Analysts in the West have not fully appreciated the enmity that the average Congolese holds toward Rwanda. Remember, it was the US and British backed Rwandan and Ugandan invasions of 1996 and 1998 that unleashed the deaths of estimated millions of Congolese. So, for one to say that Rwandan soldiers are now going to make things better for the people of the Congo does not take history into account. One merely has to look at the Congo-Ugandan action against Ugandan rebels inside Congolese territory to see where this latest action is heading. Over 600 Congolese civilians lost their lives as a result of military action against the Lord’s Resistance Army in Congo, which began over a month ago. Moreover, that operation was supposed to take a few weeks and now Uganda is requesting more time on Congo’s soil, while Congo’s gold and timber continue to find its way into Uganda.
What role are great powers playing in what is unfolding in the Congo?
It is key to understand how the game is played to keep Africa dependent and impoverished. Because the West is more powerful than the divided and weak African nations, they have been able to assassinate or systematically sideline leaders who truly serve the interest of the people. They facilitate the ascension to power of those who demonstrate a proclivity for killing their fellow Africans. Once these feckless leaders are in power and predictably incapable of governing, western diplomats condescendingly intervene on the premise that those they have assisted in acquiring power either through elections or otherwise cannot in fact justly govern. This narrative is buttressed by superficial media coverage of African society, intellectuals for hire by Western powers and the humanitarian industry. It is in this context that French President Nicolas Sarkozy and former Assistant Secretary of State for African Affairs, Herman Cohen, have proposed the balkanization and economic neutering of the Congo. They have made proposals to reward Rwanda and their Western support structure for the systematic looting of Congo, which has resulted in unmatched death and terror for the Congolese people. Nearly 125 years since Europe gave Congo to King Leopold II of Belgium as his own personal property, the situation is fundamentally the same whereby the affairs of the Congolese people are not determined by themselves; but rather by external forces.
So what can be positively drawn from recent events?
Several things can be looked at positively:
1. It is clear that international pressure works. It has moved Rwanda to at least announce the arrest of Nkunda. As was said, the litmus test for whether Nkunda has actually been arrested is his extradition to Kinshasa, otherwise for all intents and purposes he is vacationing in Rwanda at the behest of Kagame while Rwandan troops roam the hillsides of Eastern Congo with the blessing of Joseph Kabila. The U.S. is finding it increasingly difficult to defend its proxy, Rwanda, as both French and Spanish courts (the same Spanish court that ruled against Pinochet of Chile ) have arrest warrants out on President Kagame’s top officials for commission of war crimes, one of whom, Rose Kabuye, was arrested in Germany in November 2008. Despite such repeated damning evidence against the Kagame regime, under the auspices of Donald Rumsfeld’s AFRICOM program, the US sent a shipment of military equipment to Rwanda for peace keeping purposes in Western Sudan in early January 2009, coinciding with Rwandan troops intervention in Congo. The military shipment is supposed to be used for peace keeping in Western Sudan. Both Sweden and the Netherlands suspended aid to Rwanda and of course the damning December 12th UN Report have made it difficult for anyone to defend Rwanda except for some ideologically-driven humanitarian institutions. Even the New York Times editorial board continues to call for international pressure on Rwanda.
2. Kagame felt a necessity to adjust to the new realities in Washington. He could not necessarily count on President Obama to give him carte blanche as he has received from Presidents Clinton and Bush. Rwanda is certainly still a staunch ally of the U.S. However, Kagame cannot be certain that President Obama will fully support him in spite of some of the old guards (Susan Rice at the UN and Hillary Clinton as Secretary of State) being in the administration. The Obama administration can hardly present itself as an administration of change with an old policy for the Great Lakes in particular and Africa in general. The new administration would be best served to implement policies that serve the people and not strongmen like Kagame and Kabila.
3. The US and British baked resource war of aggression is being disrobed on a daily basis. The hunt for the Hutu rebels is an attempt to recast the conflict in an ethnic context. The Hutu rebels, otherwise know as the Interahamwe or Democratic Forces for the Liberation of Rwanda (FDLR in French) need to be dealt with, but not in the manner currently underway. Remember, it has been the Congolese people who have been the primary victims of the presence of the Hutu rebels in the Congo. Nonetheless, what is happening in Central Africa is a high stakes geo-political battle for precious and strategic resources that are vital to the world’s military, aeronautics, electronics and technology industries. This interview with British Foreign Minister David Miliband provides some insight and perspective on the vital corporate interests in Central Africa.
4. The average person is becoming better informed and more engaged about the root causes of the deadliest conflict in the world since World War Two. They are better equipped to demand action from their elected officials and challenge humanitarian institutions that come to their communities peddling warmed over ethnic explanations for the suffering of the people of Congo.
We are confident that with persistent education, organization and mobilization, the people of Congo will be free from the forces that have her sons and daughters living in absolute misery while we in the West benefit from her riches.
Join the global movement in support of the people of the Congo and strike a blow for justice and human dignity.
Produced by the FOTC Team
=====
Listen to weekly podcast.
Let President Obama know that a change is needed in US policy towards the Congo.
Sign-up for the Break the Silence Speakers Spring Tour.
Read the analysis on the latest UN Report on Congo by Kambale Musavuli.
Become a Friend of the Congo.
U.S. Trained Rwandan Soldiers Not the Answer
Friends Of The Congo, Jan. 20, 2009
Let us see if we got this right. The United Nations publish a groundbreaking study that affirms what the Congolese people have been saying since 1996, that U.S. backed Rwandan aggression against the Congo has not ceased since that time. The report documented Rwanda's support of rebel leader Laurent Nkunda. So in response, the Congolese government invite to its capital one of the most infamous butchers on Congo's soil, James Kabarebe, Chief of General Staff of the Rwandan Defense Forces and former private secretary and aide-de-camp of Rwanda’s president Paul Kagame. Both Kabarebe and current Congolese President Joseph Kabila were a part of the human slaughter of Congolese and Hutu refugees (men, women and children) in 1996/'97.
It is quite shocking that the people of Kinshasa allowed Kabarebe the butcher to saunter in and out of the nations capital without a peep. It is no surprise however that President Kabila welcomed Kabarebe. Kabila was under the tutelage of Kabarebe in the late 1990s and was with him at the massacre of Tingi Tingi. Today the 1996 invasion crew of Kagame, Museveni, Kabarebe and Kabila has come full circle undoubtly to heap more pain and suffering on the people of the Congo. It is far beyond time that the Congolese people rise up and reject the further militarization of their country whether it comes from Kigali or Kinshasa and ostensibly backed by Washington and London.
For the past twelve years, U.S. ally, Rwanda has used the so-called Hutu presence in Congo as a pretext for invading the country and systematically looting it of its enormous natural wealth. Unfortunately, the same pre-text is being cynically used in collaboration with the Kabila-led Congolese government to divert the mounting global pressure on the Kagame regime’s transgressions in the Congo through its proxy rebel forces in the East of Congo.
Should the newly sworn in Obama administration not want the stain of the blood and deaths of millions of Africans on its hands like the Clinton and Bush administrations, it should cease the US's militarization of the African continent and Central Africa in particular. Congo's soil has become the military playground for the United States and its Rwandan and Ugandan allies. Just over the holiday season hundreds of Congolese were slaughtered as a result of the joint Ugandan-Congo military offensive against the Lord's Resistance Army of Joseph Kony.
Militarization is not the answer. Robust political solutions are needed to address the myriad crises in Central Africa. The strengthening of Congolese institutions is needed. The Congolese people need justice and reconciliation not thousands of Rwandan troops.
A Few Key Links:
Let us see if we got this right. The United Nations publish a groundbreaking study that affirms what the Congolese people have been saying since 1996, that U.S. backed Rwandan aggression against the Congo has not ceased since that time. The report documented Rwanda's support of rebel leader Laurent Nkunda. So in response, the Congolese government invite to its capital one of the most infamous butchers on Congo's soil, James Kabarebe, Chief of General Staff of the Rwandan Defense Forces and former private secretary and aide-de-camp of Rwanda’s president Paul Kagame. Both Kabarebe and current Congolese President Joseph Kabila were a part of the human slaughter of Congolese and Hutu refugees (men, women and children) in 1996/'97.
It is quite shocking that the people of Kinshasa allowed Kabarebe the butcher to saunter in and out of the nations capital without a peep. It is no surprise however that President Kabila welcomed Kabarebe. Kabila was under the tutelage of Kabarebe in the late 1990s and was with him at the massacre of Tingi Tingi. Today the 1996 invasion crew of Kagame, Museveni, Kabarebe and Kabila has come full circle undoubtly to heap more pain and suffering on the people of the Congo. It is far beyond time that the Congolese people rise up and reject the further militarization of their country whether it comes from Kigali or Kinshasa and ostensibly backed by Washington and London.
For the past twelve years, U.S. ally, Rwanda has used the so-called Hutu presence in Congo as a pretext for invading the country and systematically looting it of its enormous natural wealth. Unfortunately, the same pre-text is being cynically used in collaboration with the Kabila-led Congolese government to divert the mounting global pressure on the Kagame regime’s transgressions in the Congo through its proxy rebel forces in the East of Congo.
Should the newly sworn in Obama administration not want the stain of the blood and deaths of millions of Africans on its hands like the Clinton and Bush administrations, it should cease the US's militarization of the African continent and Central Africa in particular. Congo's soil has become the military playground for the United States and its Rwandan and Ugandan allies. Just over the holiday season hundreds of Congolese were slaughtered as a result of the joint Ugandan-Congo military offensive against the Lord's Resistance Army of Joseph Kony.
Militarization is not the answer. Robust political solutions are needed to address the myriad crises in Central Africa. The strengthening of Congolese institutions is needed. The Congolese people need justice and reconciliation not thousands of Rwandan troops.
A Few Key Links:
- Rwanda Stirs Deadly Brew of Troubles in Congo
- Johann Hari: How we fuel Africa's bloodiest war
- Countering the FDLR
- Primer on Conflict in the Congo
Congo troops bar UN and aid staff
BBC News, Jan. 21, 2009
Congolese soldiers have been accused of barring UN troops and aid staff from an area where an operation with Rwandan troops is ongoing on a Hutu militia.
A UN spokesman in the Democratic Republic of Congo told the BBC it was "deplorable", when so many displaced people were in desperate need of help.
At least 3,000 Rwandan troops have crossed the border for the joint push on Rwandan FDLR fighters since Tuesday.
The rebel group's leaders have been linked to the 1994 Rwandan genocide.
DR Congo and Rwanda agreed last month to take joint action against the Hutu rebels of the Democratic Forces for the Liberation of Rwanda (FDLR), which is estimated to be more than 6,000-strong.
The BBC's Thomas Fessy in the Congolese capital, Kinshasa, says hundreds more Rwandan troops entered North Kivu province on Wednesday, according to UN sources, following the 2,000 who crossed over the day before.
Our correspondent says there has been no fighting reported so far as both armies appear to be still making preparations.
Some troops are heading towards Rutshuru, 70km (45 miles) north of Goma, and others have been deployed near the strategic town of Sake, 30km (12 miles) west of the provincial capital.
The UN Mission in the Democratic Republic of Congo (Monuc) said its peacekeepers and aid workers had been blocked by Congolese troops at checkpoints north of Goma.
Monuc military spokesman Lt Col Jean Paul Dietrich told the BBC's Focus on Africa programme they had protested to the Congolese authorities.
"We've just tried to negotiate since yesterday that our force should have the [access] guarantee," he said.
"Not only for us, the Monuc force, but as well all humanitarian [agencies] desperately need to get to those IDPs [internally displaced persons] in those areas.
"And so far it seems that the blockade cannot be lifted and we deplore that and we cannot accept that. We will continue to keep up pressure."
AFP news agency reported that a convoy of Indian UN peacekeepers and a Red Cross vehicle had been turned away.
The Congolese authorities have said the operation to flush out the FLDR would last between 10 and 15 days, but Lt Col Dietrich said this would be a "very challenging task" in such a short timeframe.
'Simply grave'
Congolese President Joseph Kabila has reportedly come under fire for not informing parliament about the invitation to Rwandan troops.
"If what I'm told is true, it's quite simply grave. It raises lots of questions," parliamentary speaker Vital Kamerhe told the UN-run Radio Okapi.
The UN and aid agencies have raised concerns about the threat posed to civilians on the ground.
Rwanda twice invaded its much larger neighbour during the 1990s, saying it was pursuing the FDLR.
But analysts say much of the fighting is also linked to eastern DR Congo's rich mineral resources, which all sides have been accused of plundering.
Action against the Hutu fighters has been a key demand of the Congolese Tutsi rebel CNDP (National Congress for the Defence of the People), which declared a ceasefire last week.
The CNDP, which seized swathes of territory last year, has offered to join Congolese government troops in fighting the FDLR.
Our correspondent says the CNDP may well be part of the operation, but no details have been given about how they could be integrated to the Congolese army.
On-and-off fighting involving the CNDP, FDLR, the army and pro-government militias has forced more than one million people in North Kivu to flee their homes since late 2006.
Before last month's deal was signed, the UN accused Rwanda and DR Congo of fighting a proxy war in the region - with Rwanda backing Gen Nkunda and DR Congo of working with the FDLR.
Also see:
Rwanda: 'The Israel of Africa'
Friends Of The Congo
Congolese soldiers have been accused of barring UN troops and aid staff from an area where an operation with Rwandan troops is ongoing on a Hutu militia.
A UN spokesman in the Democratic Republic of Congo told the BBC it was "deplorable", when so many displaced people were in desperate need of help.
At least 3,000 Rwandan troops have crossed the border for the joint push on Rwandan FDLR fighters since Tuesday.
The rebel group's leaders have been linked to the 1994 Rwandan genocide.
DR Congo and Rwanda agreed last month to take joint action against the Hutu rebels of the Democratic Forces for the Liberation of Rwanda (FDLR), which is estimated to be more than 6,000-strong.
The BBC's Thomas Fessy in the Congolese capital, Kinshasa, says hundreds more Rwandan troops entered North Kivu province on Wednesday, according to UN sources, following the 2,000 who crossed over the day before.
Our correspondent says there has been no fighting reported so far as both armies appear to be still making preparations.
Some troops are heading towards Rutshuru, 70km (45 miles) north of Goma, and others have been deployed near the strategic town of Sake, 30km (12 miles) west of the provincial capital.
The UN Mission in the Democratic Republic of Congo (Monuc) said its peacekeepers and aid workers had been blocked by Congolese troops at checkpoints north of Goma.
Monuc military spokesman Lt Col Jean Paul Dietrich told the BBC's Focus on Africa programme they had protested to the Congolese authorities.
"We've just tried to negotiate since yesterday that our force should have the [access] guarantee," he said.
"Not only for us, the Monuc force, but as well all humanitarian [agencies] desperately need to get to those IDPs [internally displaced persons] in those areas.
"And so far it seems that the blockade cannot be lifted and we deplore that and we cannot accept that. We will continue to keep up pressure."
AFP news agency reported that a convoy of Indian UN peacekeepers and a Red Cross vehicle had been turned away.
The Congolese authorities have said the operation to flush out the FLDR would last between 10 and 15 days, but Lt Col Dietrich said this would be a "very challenging task" in such a short timeframe.
'Simply grave'
Congolese President Joseph Kabila has reportedly come under fire for not informing parliament about the invitation to Rwandan troops.
"If what I'm told is true, it's quite simply grave. It raises lots of questions," parliamentary speaker Vital Kamerhe told the UN-run Radio Okapi.
The UN and aid agencies have raised concerns about the threat posed to civilians on the ground.
Rwanda twice invaded its much larger neighbour during the 1990s, saying it was pursuing the FDLR.
But analysts say much of the fighting is also linked to eastern DR Congo's rich mineral resources, which all sides have been accused of plundering.
Action against the Hutu fighters has been a key demand of the Congolese Tutsi rebel CNDP (National Congress for the Defence of the People), which declared a ceasefire last week.
The CNDP, which seized swathes of territory last year, has offered to join Congolese government troops in fighting the FDLR.
Our correspondent says the CNDP may well be part of the operation, but no details have been given about how they could be integrated to the Congolese army.
On-and-off fighting involving the CNDP, FDLR, the army and pro-government militias has forced more than one million people in North Kivu to flee their homes since late 2006.
Before last month's deal was signed, the UN accused Rwanda and DR Congo of fighting a proxy war in the region - with Rwanda backing Gen Nkunda and DR Congo of working with the FDLR.
Also see:
Rwanda: 'The Israel of Africa'
Friends Of The Congo
Bush open to Liberia hosting U.S. military command
By Jeremy Pelofsky, Feb. 16, 2008
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - President George W. Bush said on Friday the possible shift of the U.S. military command for Africa to the continent from its current home in Germany will be on the agenda as he meets with leaders of five African countries.
Bush on Friday departed for a six-day trip to Africa to highlight one of the few bright spots in his foreign policy agenda, assistance to HIV/AIDS victims and helping budding businesses. He will visit Tanzania, Ghana, Benin, Liberia and Rwanda.
But the conflicts in Darfur and Kenya will also be on the agenda, as well as lobbying from African leaders on where to locate the new Africa Command headquarters, known as Africom, whose primary mission will be to work with African militaries.
"If there is going to be a physical presence on the continent of Africa in the forms of a headquarters ... obviously we would seriously consider Liberia," Bush said in an interview with foreign media on Thursday and released on Friday.
In the interview, Bush said there was a path forward in Kenya, which has been wracked with violence after a disputed election.
"There is a way forward, which is for the parties to come together in good faith, and work out a way forward until there are new elections," he said.
Bush has asked Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice to go to Kenya with a message that there must be a full return to democracy and she will be in Nairobi on Monday.
The U.S. attention to Africa has been growing over the last few years amid concerns that countries there could become safe havens for militants seeking to base operations and plan attacks on the United States.
"Africom is a brand new concept aimed at strengthening nations' capacities to deal with trafficking or terror, but also to help nations develop forces capable of doing the peacekeeping that unfortunately too often is needed on the continent," Bush said.
The U.S. has some 1,700 troops in Djibouti. While Liberia has offered to host Africom, regional powers like South Africa and Nigeria have been wary.
The U.S. military divides the world into regional commands. Previously, responsibility for Africa was split between European Command, Pacific Command and Central Command, which is the headquarters for the Middle East.
A year ago Bush announced the creation of Africom and has been headquartered for the time being in Stuttgart, Germany.
U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon on Friday urged Bush to speak with African leaders about helping people over poverty as well as the lack of basic sanitation of educational opportunities.
"Your visit to African states at this time will be very important and historic," Ban told reporters after meeting with Bush at the White House. "In that regard, I wish you all the best. This is very great opportunities."
It is the second trip to Africa for Bush, and the fifth for his wife, Laura. (Additional reporting by David Alexander, Editing by Jackie Frank)
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - President George W. Bush said on Friday the possible shift of the U.S. military command for Africa to the continent from its current home in Germany will be on the agenda as he meets with leaders of five African countries.
Bush on Friday departed for a six-day trip to Africa to highlight one of the few bright spots in his foreign policy agenda, assistance to HIV/AIDS victims and helping budding businesses. He will visit Tanzania, Ghana, Benin, Liberia and Rwanda.
But the conflicts in Darfur and Kenya will also be on the agenda, as well as lobbying from African leaders on where to locate the new Africa Command headquarters, known as Africom, whose primary mission will be to work with African militaries.
"If there is going to be a physical presence on the continent of Africa in the forms of a headquarters ... obviously we would seriously consider Liberia," Bush said in an interview with foreign media on Thursday and released on Friday.
In the interview, Bush said there was a path forward in Kenya, which has been wracked with violence after a disputed election.
"There is a way forward, which is for the parties to come together in good faith, and work out a way forward until there are new elections," he said.
Bush has asked Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice to go to Kenya with a message that there must be a full return to democracy and she will be in Nairobi on Monday.
The U.S. attention to Africa has been growing over the last few years amid concerns that countries there could become safe havens for militants seeking to base operations and plan attacks on the United States.
"Africom is a brand new concept aimed at strengthening nations' capacities to deal with trafficking or terror, but also to help nations develop forces capable of doing the peacekeeping that unfortunately too often is needed on the continent," Bush said.
The U.S. has some 1,700 troops in Djibouti. While Liberia has offered to host Africom, regional powers like South Africa and Nigeria have been wary.
The U.S. military divides the world into regional commands. Previously, responsibility for Africa was split between European Command, Pacific Command and Central Command, which is the headquarters for the Middle East.
A year ago Bush announced the creation of Africom and has been headquartered for the time being in Stuttgart, Germany.
U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon on Friday urged Bush to speak with African leaders about helping people over poverty as well as the lack of basic sanitation of educational opportunities.
"Your visit to African states at this time will be very important and historic," Ban told reporters after meeting with Bush at the White House. "In that regard, I wish you all the best. This is very great opportunities."
It is the second trip to Africa for Bush, and the fifth for his wife, Laura. (Additional reporting by David Alexander, Editing by Jackie Frank)
Bush Africa visit met by protest & viewed with distrust
Bush Africa visit seen more about strategy than compassion
By Barry Moody, Reuters, Feb. 15, 2008
DAR ES SALAAM (Reuters) - President George W. Bush's coming African tour will emphasize the caring side of U.S. policy but it is widely seen as being more about military interests, oil supplies and combating Chinese influence.
Bush is scheduled to start a tour of five nations with a brief stop in Benin on Saturday, although he has threatened to delay the trip because of a legislative battle with Congress.
The five countries -- Tanzania, Ghana, Liberia and Rwanda, as well as Benin -- have been chosen for what are viewed as strong democratic credentials and successful U.S. aid projects.
The centerpiece and longest stop of the tour will be Tanzania, whose leader, President Jakaya Kikwete, is seen by Washington as a poster boy for progressive African government.
Bush, accompanied by his wife Laura, will visit hospitals, schools, AIDS and malaria projects. In Tanzania he will sign the biggest ever grant, of $698 million, under his Millennium Challenge Corp, to fund water, energy and infrastructure.
The MCC is intended to reward good governance and sound economic policies.
Kikwete named a new cabinet this week after the previous prime minister resigned over a corruption probe but Washington sees this as confirmation of the president's anti-graft credentials rather than an embarrassment.
Bush's attempt to anoint some of his more successful policies in Africa in the dying months of his presidency risks being derailed by cynicism over U.S. motives and the same issues, led by Iraq, that have made him unpopular elsewhere.
About 2,000 Muslims marched peacefully through Dar es Salaam on Friday to protest against Bush and his war on terror.
One of the march organizers, Sheikh Mussa Kundecha, told Reuters: "Bush will be here for his own benefit instead of caring about the people of the country."
Student Emmanuel Dickson said earlier: "America and Bush have one policy, to look after their own interests. If he is going to give us money for infrastructure and health ... what does he want in return? He wants to bring forces to Africa and he wants to stop the Chinese from getting a greater hold."
Beijing is now Africa's third biggest trading partner, behind the European Union and the United States, after a huge 30 percent jump in the first 10 months of 2007.
AFRICOM
Analysts say confused U.S. policy on Africa and bad handling of its new Africa command (Africom), particularly premature discussion of basing it on the continent, have alienated regional powers like South Africa and made Washington unpopular.
Bush approved Africom, a new command for Africa to offer both training to African armies and humanitarian work, a year ago. But African opposition has forced it for the moment to shelve plans to base the headquarters on the continent.
Africom has added to Africa's unhappiness over other elements of Bush's post 9/11 campaign against Islamist militants.
U.S. backing for the Ethiopian invasion of Somalia a year ago to prop up a weak transitional government against Islamist insurgents and the subsequent "rendition" of Muslim suspects, including Kenyan nationals, to Ethiopia has caused widespread anger.
Patrick Smith of the Africa Confidential newsletter said U.S. policy "appears to be at sea ... what is the foundation of the policy? Is it a security nexus based on militarization or is it a much more development-oriented policy?"
"There is a sense that Africa has got the fag end of the war on terror and that it has been very badly handled and if anything has diminished the U.S.'s standing in the region with no great benefit in terms of military effect."
There is also a widely held belief around the continent that Bush is trying to counteract growing Asian, especially Chinese, influence and investment and that Washington is only really interested in oil resources in the Gulf of Guinea -- expected to provide 25 percent of its needs by 2015.
"What is on top of Bush's mind is the Chinese. China is worrying to the U.S. It is not only taking markets and alternative trade partnerships ...African countries will no longer need American aid to survive," said Ugandan student Joseph Mwaka.
Houcine Akkari, a retired man in Tunis told Reuters: "The U.S. says it wants to help Africa to boost democracy, reduce poverty and improve governance. But the truth is so different. Bush wants to exploit Africa which is rich in natural resources, without giving anything to Africa." (Additional reporting by Wangui Kanina, Francis Kwera in Kampala, and Sonia Ounissi in Tunis)
By Barry Moody, Reuters, Feb. 15, 2008
DAR ES SALAAM (Reuters) - President George W. Bush's coming African tour will emphasize the caring side of U.S. policy but it is widely seen as being more about military interests, oil supplies and combating Chinese influence.
Bush is scheduled to start a tour of five nations with a brief stop in Benin on Saturday, although he has threatened to delay the trip because of a legislative battle with Congress.
The five countries -- Tanzania, Ghana, Liberia and Rwanda, as well as Benin -- have been chosen for what are viewed as strong democratic credentials and successful U.S. aid projects.
The centerpiece and longest stop of the tour will be Tanzania, whose leader, President Jakaya Kikwete, is seen by Washington as a poster boy for progressive African government.
Bush, accompanied by his wife Laura, will visit hospitals, schools, AIDS and malaria projects. In Tanzania he will sign the biggest ever grant, of $698 million, under his Millennium Challenge Corp, to fund water, energy and infrastructure.
The MCC is intended to reward good governance and sound economic policies.
Kikwete named a new cabinet this week after the previous prime minister resigned over a corruption probe but Washington sees this as confirmation of the president's anti-graft credentials rather than an embarrassment.
Bush's attempt to anoint some of his more successful policies in Africa in the dying months of his presidency risks being derailed by cynicism over U.S. motives and the same issues, led by Iraq, that have made him unpopular elsewhere.
About 2,000 Muslims marched peacefully through Dar es Salaam on Friday to protest against Bush and his war on terror.
One of the march organizers, Sheikh Mussa Kundecha, told Reuters: "Bush will be here for his own benefit instead of caring about the people of the country."
Student Emmanuel Dickson said earlier: "America and Bush have one policy, to look after their own interests. If he is going to give us money for infrastructure and health ... what does he want in return? He wants to bring forces to Africa and he wants to stop the Chinese from getting a greater hold."
Beijing is now Africa's third biggest trading partner, behind the European Union and the United States, after a huge 30 percent jump in the first 10 months of 2007.
AFRICOM
Analysts say confused U.S. policy on Africa and bad handling of its new Africa command (Africom), particularly premature discussion of basing it on the continent, have alienated regional powers like South Africa and made Washington unpopular.
Bush approved Africom, a new command for Africa to offer both training to African armies and humanitarian work, a year ago. But African opposition has forced it for the moment to shelve plans to base the headquarters on the continent.
Africom has added to Africa's unhappiness over other elements of Bush's post 9/11 campaign against Islamist militants.
U.S. backing for the Ethiopian invasion of Somalia a year ago to prop up a weak transitional government against Islamist insurgents and the subsequent "rendition" of Muslim suspects, including Kenyan nationals, to Ethiopia has caused widespread anger.
Patrick Smith of the Africa Confidential newsletter said U.S. policy "appears to be at sea ... what is the foundation of the policy? Is it a security nexus based on militarization or is it a much more development-oriented policy?"
"There is a sense that Africa has got the fag end of the war on terror and that it has been very badly handled and if anything has diminished the U.S.'s standing in the region with no great benefit in terms of military effect."
There is also a widely held belief around the continent that Bush is trying to counteract growing Asian, especially Chinese, influence and investment and that Washington is only really interested in oil resources in the Gulf of Guinea -- expected to provide 25 percent of its needs by 2015.
"What is on top of Bush's mind is the Chinese. China is worrying to the U.S. It is not only taking markets and alternative trade partnerships ...African countries will no longer need American aid to survive," said Ugandan student Joseph Mwaka.
Houcine Akkari, a retired man in Tunis told Reuters: "The U.S. says it wants to help Africa to boost democracy, reduce poverty and improve governance. But the truth is so different. Bush wants to exploit Africa which is rich in natural resources, without giving anything to Africa." (Additional reporting by Wangui Kanina, Francis Kwera in Kampala, and Sonia Ounissi in Tunis)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)